TIGER MUTHIAH Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER claims to be a public spirited citizen and he is the former General secretary of the Student Wing of Indian National Congress Party for Tamil Nadu State and he is associated with the activities of that organisation. PETITIONER alleges that in the case relating to the murder of the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, some of the accused have been found guilty by the Honourable Supreme Court and four of them were sentenced to death these four persons have submitted their mercy petitions before the President of India and the same are pending consideration. The petitioner herein would contend that the members of the various political organisations are campaigning against the imposition of death penalty and prayed that the President shall use his discretionary power for granting pardon. This, according to the petitioner is illegal interference with the presidential power and therefore, there shall be a writ of mandamus to the effect that the respondents 1 and 2 shall enforce the law in the State of Tamil Nadu and shall initiate suitable action in accordance with law against the persons for publishing any statement or appeal in newspapers or organising processions or meetings seeking favorable orders on the mercy petitions filed by the accused persons, which are pending consideration before the President.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the presidential power for granting pardon is exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and this is also a part of the judicial process and therefore, it shall not be interfered with by others. The petitioner has also contended that the Supreme Court being the highest Court of the land, has given the verdict that the four accused have been sentenced to death and any complaint against such imposition of penalty is against the process of law and therefore, the law enforcing authorities shall proceed against them. We do not think that such contention is correct. In a democratic country like India, every citizen has got freedom of expression, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution. Every citizen has got a right to express his views and publish the same through the medium of press. Every citizen has also got a right to create the public opinion in respect of any subject. That does not amount to interference with the exercising of the presidential powers under Article 72 of the Constitution for granting pardon. We do not think that campaigning against the death penalty would amount to violation of the principles of law and that it will amount to unlawful interference with the presidential power. Therefore it is not proper to direct the respondents to initiate any action against on such persons as it would amounts to interference with their fundamental rights of the citizen.